This morning, on WSSP 1250 Sports Radio, the host Doug Russell listened to a point a caller made and then said that the caller’s comment was “very, very well taken”. While we know that this essentially means that Doug is acknowledging a good point, couldn’t this just as easily mean that Doug is really complimenting himself because he has received this comment so well? I’m considering changing my use of this expression to this more literal interpretation from now on. If I really feel strongly that I’ve listened to and understood a point particularly well, I will say “point well taken”. I’ll let you know how it works.

I completely agree with Andy’s post below, most especially his recommendation that we should keep an eye on the situation with Jason Taylor. Before the draft, I had a relatively simple view of the potential trade with the Dolphins for Taylor: I didn’t want to give up our 1st round pick, was on the fence about giving up one of our 2nd round picks and was enthusiastic about giving up our 3rd round pick.

Bill Parcells said for months that he would not trade Taylor and pledged that Taylor would be a Dolphin or he would retire. Parcells even went so far as to accuse those who reported on a possible trade of lying. Then over the weekend, Dolphins GM Jeff Ireland acknowledged that the Dolphins had, indeed, had talks about trading Taylor.

In any case, I’m not sure what, if anything the Packers could give the Dolphins to convince them to part with Taylor now. I read the report that Andy cites. (You can see it and the follow-up story by Armando Salguero, who broke the story, here.) It’s hard to imagine with all of the animosity there — now public — that Taylor can remain with the Dolphins. If that’s right, there might be something of a fire-sale, especially now that the team that tried to trade for him before the draft, the Jacksonville Jaguars, gave up an insane amount to move up in the draft to select Derrick Harvey.

Ted, if you’re reading this (and we know you are), it’s worth a phone call.

This morning on Mike and Mike in the morning, ESPN radio, they were discussing how Bill Parcells apparently handled a recent meeting with Jason Taylor. Taylor had taken a break from Dancing with the Stars (a questionable pursuit at best) to stop by Dolphin headquarters, say hi to teammates and wanted to stop in and say hi to Parcells as well. When he showed up at the threshold of Parcells office, Parcells looked up, saw Taylor, didn’t say anything and then went back to watching film. Taylor then left and was understandably pissed about this. Parcells apparently has been mad at Taylor for not showing up to the voluntary camp thing even though Taylor had said a while ago he couldn’t because of his, again, admittedly questionable, commitment to…dancing. Mike and Mike were criticizing Parcells for handling this so poorly considering Taylor is still one of their best players.

I agree. I think Parcells is an idiot. It really got me thinking about the social license we seem to give jerks, as long as they are successful. Many argue that football is just a tough sport and his toughness and cold demeanor are part of what have made him successful. I don’t buy that. I think Tom Coughlin only won a Super Bowl AFTER he softened some and remembered he’s dealing with humans. Think of all of the people in general society and some of the people you know personally, who are total jackasses but who have become successful somehow. Like the previous discussion re Peyton Manning, it is hard to get behind people who whine, complain, treat people disrespectfully, or just plain have no tact, like Parcells. Packerbelle makes a great point in the previous Peyton Manning post comments section when she indicates that part of what hurts about seeing Favre go is how much he respected the game, his teammates, his coaches. He very very rarely whined (he did publicly snap at James Jones last year, but that was uncharacteristic). It is a marvel to me to this day that Favre could classfully (if you will, nice new word) absorb yet another predictable draw play call from Tom Rossley on 3rd and 16 without screaming at him on the sidelines.

I feel lucky that in my lifetime, two of my greatest sports heroes also happen to be two of the classiest guys to play on the biggest sports stages – Sidney Moncrief and Brett Favre. Sorry, tangenting.

Anyway, getting back to my point. I do think we should keep Taylor on our radar. I know the draft is done and some of our ammo for making a trade has been eliminated, but still, I think TT should keep an eye on this because Taylor would be a great veteran addition to our team and it’s possible if this war between Taylor and Parcells isn’t resolved soon, the stubborn Parcells could dump Taylor for less than he was originally seeking.

Yesterday we pointed out some silliness in the post-draft analysis offered by NFL.com’s Vic Carrucci.

Among other curious points, he offered this self-contradictory critique of the decision to draft Brian Brohm in the second round: “Doesn’t Aaron Rodgers have enough pressure on him as Brett Favre’s replacement and with the potential that Favre might come back from retirement? Why invest another second-rounder in Louisville QB Brian Brohm, even if he was widely projected as a first-round pick?”

It was a bizarre critique on its face — the Packers took Brohm in the second round in part because, having been widely projected as a first-round pick, they would get great value. But his latest comments are stranger still. Brohm, writes Carruci, might have been “the steal of the draft.”

Huh?

Carrucci writes:

The Green Bay Packers might have gotten the steal of the draft by landing Brohm with the 26th pick of the second round, 56th overall. Most draft analysts had the former Louisville star being chosen higher than Flacco, and some had him going as high as the middle of the first round.

Packers officials have tried to downplay the impact Brohm’s selection would have on Aaron Rodgers, who is supposed to be the heir to retired Brett Favre. Rodgers, Green Bay’s first-round pick in 2005, has shown impressive flashes in Favre’s place. General Manager Ted Thompson and coach Mike McCarthy were quick to stress that Rodgers is still the team’s starting quarterback. However, his inability to stay healthy has raised concerns over whether he has what it takes to be a consistently effective starter.

It would not be a shock to see Brohm provide a fairly strong push during the preseason. He was not drafted to spend his career as a backup.

This is awesome. I’ve long been surprised at the pass Peyton Manning gets from the media when he screams at his players. He does it constantly, in virtually every game I’ve seen him play. (I’ve noted this on the site before. In mid-December, ESPN rated Manning the #2 QB in the game and Favre the #3 QB in the game, despite Favre’s better numbers through that point in the season. After pointing this out in this post, I wrote: “Apparently the judges gave bonus points for arm-flailing before the snap and whining after incompletions, so Manning got the nod.” Earlier that month we included Manning on a short list of QBs who blame their teammates when things go wrong.)

There is no better example of this than this video clip from YouTube (H/T, profootballtalk.com). Enjoy.

Read here from jsonline’s Tom Silverstein and Greg Bedard about Justin Beaver getting a tryout from the Packers this weekend. No free agent contract, just a tryout. Smart TT, very smart. I have written previously about my concern for the trend in the NFL of having shifty, juke-type runners as kick/punt returners because maybe after being successful for part of a season, they all seem to get tentative or afraid and then suck. Hester being the exception. (There was also the Mike Sherman trend of using fat, incredibly slow guys to return kicks but needless to say that didn’t catch on because it was a ridiculous idea).

I think Justin Beaver should be the Packers return guy and here’s why. Justin Beaver ran a 4.45 40, so he’s fast. He does have some juke in him, but he’s also a solid guy. While only 5’7″, Beaver is still 191 pounds, so he’s no Philip Epps and can probably take a hit or two. But most importantly, he has a bit of crazy in him. He’s at least would be crazy enough to catch a punt running full speed hoping to break one. And, throw in there that he wants more than anything to play in the NFL – he’s more likely than some guy who is already safely on the roster to take chances and be aggressive. Desmond Howard was like this too in his first few years as a return man, until he became good. Then he got tentative and sucked. For someone who knows he’s such a long-shot, I can’t see Beaver ever getting tentative.

Now, I am assuming they will think to try him as a return guy but maybe they are looking at him just as a RB. We’ll see, but good luck Justin – he’d certainly be a popular Packer in Wisconsin.

I hope this report is not true. In Bob Wolfley’s column in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel this morning he flags a story that tells us that Brett Favre had his first facial and pedicure. Brett Favre, metrosexual.

According to an Associated Press report, when Favre and his wife Deanna were in New York last week they saw a Broadway play, “Jersey Boys,” and, according to Matt Hasselbeck, Favre had his first facial and a pedicure.

Hasselbeck also was in New York and spent time with his former teammate.

“He’ll probably kill me for this,” said the Seattle quarterback, referring to sharing that information with the press. “It was something he and his wife Deanna did together,” Hasselbeck said. “I feel sorry for the woman who did the pedicure.”

That is just so wrong. Favre is the personification of modern manhood, the avatar of guyness. And now he’s getting a pedicure? And a facial?

Full disclosure: I had a pedicure once. I’m scarred by it to this day. (My wife gave it to me as a present.) I will never have another one. And I have never had a facial.

I thought Laura Ingraham was wrong to criticize Favre for his tears during his farewell press conference. But if she wants to go after him for this, I’ll be standing right behind her.

Aaron at Cheesehead.tv feels very, very strongly that people should not give out grades to evaluate the NFL draft. He writes:

Why is it that people feel compelled to ‘grade’ the draft less than 24 hours after it’s completion? It is such an amazing exercise in futility, I simply can’t believe people A) Write them and B) Read them.

My favorite is the “I don’t like to give out grades, but if I HAD to…” which is truly the worst of the whole grading phenomenon. Look, you’re wasting time as it is, but at least grab the bull by the horns and declare “THIS IS MY GRADE FOR THE PACKERS DRAFT!”

He goes on to call grades not only “bullshit” but “complete bullshit.” And then he concludes:

Come on, people. We’re smarter than this. Grades are for the fools at the draft who boo Thompson and the idiots who watch SportsCenter. It’s time to evolve…

Wow. Everyone has a pet issue, I guess. Those are some serious feelings about people who give grades for the NFL draft and I’m one of them. Okay, I didn’t really give grades (plural), but at the end of my lost post on the Packers’ draft I threw on a B+ as a “preliminary grade.” I don’t know why I did it. Probably because I have issues dating back to Mrs. Guenther, my fourth grade teacher, who gave me lower grades than I deserved and tinkled an annoying little dinner bell whenever she wanted to quiet the class.

The problem with Aaron’s post is that he never really explains the root of his rage. He says it’s an “amazing exercise in futility” but doesn’t tell us why. Is it because we cannot know how these players will perform as professionals? Isn’t it true that some of the best prospects turn out to be busts and some no-names turn out to be stars? Doesn’t every draft have a Ryan Leaf and a Donald Driver?

Fair enough. But then why offer any analysis of the picks at all? I though Aaron himself had a pretty smart take on things in his post entitled “Day One Thoughts,” where he wrote: “Brian Brohm at pick number 56 is an absolute steal. Brilliant pick, though I’ll admit, my initial thought was that Thompson had just become the guy in your fantasy league who grabs two Top 10 quarterbacks in the first three rounds and then proceeds to tell everyone what good trade-bait one of them will make…”

Help me out here. You can provide instant evaluation of a pick as “brilliant” and “a steal” and that’s okay, but if you slap a grade on it then it’s an exercise in futility and shows you haven’t evolved?

I understand that giving grades is premature and overly simplistic. I trust that most of our readers do, too. But Aaron, if the guys giving grades are just wasting time, what about the guys who write long posts opposing the guys who waste time giving grades?

All of that said, be sure to check out Aaron’s take from the second day of the draft at Radio City Music Hall, where he runs into a guy who has brought his own stopwatch to the draft. You’ll feel like you’re there with him and it’ll make you want to go next year. It is a fantastic post.